Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Background Checks

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by dmv9, Feb 15, 2014.

  1. dmv9

    dmv9 Seattle, WA Member

    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    19
  2. Hawaiian

    Hawaiian Tigard Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,289
    Likes Received:
    1,653
    A lot of gun owners are not against background checks, they are against the Gov't registration the anit's are tacking on to it.
     
    Koda and (deleted member) like this.
  3. slimer13

    slimer13 Deer Park Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,872
    Likes Received:
    3,217
    The 2A and the federalist papers do not mention rights that are granted after you have to pay a fee and wait for a permission slip to exercise them.
     
  4. PiratePast40

    PiratePast40 Willamette Valley Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,098
    Likes Received:
    2,085
    If the reason is to vet the purchaser, then why is the make, model, caliber, and serial number of the gun required?
     
    Fast Eddie, Riot, Redcap and 21 others like this.
  5. bnsaibum

    bnsaibum Corvallis, OR Well-Known Member 2015 Volunteer

    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    486
    What is done with those denials? Currently it is against the law to lie on the form. If you fill out the form truthfully the FFL must turn you down without even running a background check if you are a prohibited person. In that sense it is not illegal for a prohibited person to attempt to acquire a firearm. If the prohibited person lies on the form that is when the NICS check is supposed to catch it with a possible penalty of up to 10 years under 18 U.S. Code § 924. Of the 2% that are denials, with half being felons, how many are investigated and prosecuted? How can anyone say that the current law is ineffective and we need more laws when the current law is not even used?
     
  6. Koda

    Koda Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    2,202
    Likes Received:
    3,023
    ask yourself what part of "background check" has to do with the make model and serial number of the gun YOUR buying?

    background checks are a lie.
     
    Stomper, The Heretic, Redcap and 3 others like this.
  7. bnsaibum

    bnsaibum Corvallis, OR Well-Known Member 2015 Volunteer

    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    486
    Are you asking about background checks in general or in relation to the measures in your state?
     
  8. The Heretic

    The Heretic Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,127
    Likes Received:
    6,989
    Exactly. I've made that point a number of times.

    The only reason for wanting the type, model and serial number of a firearm to run a background check is to implement a de-facto registration scheme.


    -----


    Besides that, the 2%/half argument is the old "if it just saves one life it is worth it" argument just reworded as "if we just stop one felon from having a gun". It doesn't stop them if they are determined, they will just go get a gun illegally.

    Beyond that - how many of those people who were denied expected to be denied? How many were surprised that due to some past mistake they made in their youth they are considered to be a "felon"?

    Really, if you know you are a felon, and there is a background check *required* to buy a firearm, and you can be prosecuted for even trying to buy the firearm, are you going to try? Are you going to waste $10 to be denied?

    I would assert some major percentage of those denied did not know they would be denied, because they did not know that they were unqualified - they thought they weren't a felon.
     
    orygun and (deleted member) like this.
  9. Blitzkrieg

    Blitzkrieg WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,674
    Likes Received:
    4,849
    Shall not be infringed
     
    WilliamIV, Martini_Up, Redcap and 9 others like this.
  10. Martini_Up

    Martini_Up NW USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    ...and besides. If a person walking the streets isn't to be trusted buying a firearm, what makes us believe they are safe enough to be walking the streets at all? What makes us believe they won't acquire a firearms through nefarious means?

    Background checks aren't about keeping guns from people who will use them in a crime, background checks are A STEP in making firearms and the 2A null and void to all but the government.
     
  11. Redcap

    Redcap Lewis County, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    2,731
    This.

    /thread
     
  12. bnsaibum

    bnsaibum Corvallis, OR Well-Known Member 2015 Volunteer

    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    486
    Exactly! How many times have we heard gun prohibitionists say "We know it won't stop all the violence, but it is a STEP in the right direction." We heard it just recently from the Oregon Governor, Mr. Spaceman and a whole host of ignorant but presumably well intentioned citizens at the Feb 6 Oregon Senate Judiciary hearing on SB 1551. Incrementalism, right in your face and most of the public are too ignorant to see it.
     
  13. The Heretic

    The Heretic Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,127
    Likes Received:
    6,989
    Background checks don't stop felons from owning firearms any more than requiring drivers licenses and insurance keep drunk drivers or uninsured/unlicensed drivers off the road.

    I once got a speeding ticket in Seattle, I was unemployed so instead of just paying it I went to court to get it knocked down a little.

    Almost everyone there (about a dozen people) was there for driving without a license and/or uninsured.

    The judge let everyone of them go with a suspension; if they went out and got a license and/or insurance, then came back with that proof in 90 days, then the ticket would fall off their record in one year and they would pay no fine, no court costs.

    Worse, for those few of use with speeding tickets, he was deciding how much we should pay based on our occupation - i.e., he asked us our occupation and then pronounced what the fine would be.
     
  14. NWShooters

    NWShooters Oregon Member

    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    8
    That's easy to argue against.

    1. I'm not against BG checks

    2. I'm against gun registration which is what Dems mandate be part of BG checks. See NY pistol permit holders having heir personal information being shared with the world by the press, the recent police raid in Iowa, and CA gun confiscations for evidence on why we don't support registration and the subsequent database.

    3. I'm against requiring a BG check system that can be manipulated by anti-gunners through slowing it down and creating choke points, and unreasonable fee's. It's just another weapon to be used to make it harder to exercise our rights.

    4. Name one mass shooting that would have been stopped by a BG check.
     
  15. timac

    timac Loading Magazines! Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,004
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    As many have said, "Steps". Already the "Steps" JBT's have taken, they know what firearms you own if bought through shops. They don't know if you have more or less firearms, through legal private sales.
    They want to stop this bit of freedom and add these "Steps", to have absolute control of all firearm sales. Many gradual "Steps" will lead to confiscation and absolute subjugation.
     
  16. Koda

    Koda Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    2,202
    Likes Received:
    3,023
    if the $100,000 investment I convinced my company to buy only returned 2% savings I would be fired. I cant for the life of me understand why anyone, especially a 2A supporter, would want to expand the current NICS system.... oh wait, its not really a "background check" system now is it.
     
    MikeE and (deleted member) like this.
  17. dmv9

    dmv9 Seattle, WA Member

    Messages:
    134
    Likes Received:
    19
    I've always wondered why the gun information is on the background check. It should be a completely separate transaction! One is to verify that you can have a gun (background check with name information only). And the either is an commerce transaction and that data is only with the store.

    All good stuff here! Thanks.
     
  18. Flash

    Flash Vancouver Member

    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    44
    2010 there were more than 76,000 firearms purchases denied by the federal instant check system, only 62 were referred for prosecution and only 44 actually deemed worthy to prosecuted, only 13 were prosecuted. With that being the case, do you really think that back ground checks are really what their after? I think with the information they ask it is very clear that registration is the real purpose for this new universal back ground check of all firearms. It is the only way of finding out where all the other firearms are that were made years ago that are not in the system. That is what is needed before confiscation. If the numbers were true and they were sincere about it the prosecution rate would be much higher.:thumbup:
     
  19. 2506

    2506 Seattle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,372
    Likes Received:
    746
    Last time I bought a gun, I thought what I went through was about as much of a background check as I'd ever want.
     
  20. Trlsmn

    Trlsmn In Utero (Portland) Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    1,186
    If a background check is just a background check why when purchasing multiple firearms at the same time must I list them all? Its not like I would be approved on one firearm and not a second firearm. So it then becomes obvious that the purpose then can only be that there is an illegal database being compiled.

    Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk
     
    Flash, orygun, WilliamIV and 3 others like this.